• CJEM · Mar 2024

    Meta Analysis Comparative Study

    Comparison of peer-assisted learning with expert-led learning in medical school ultrasound education: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

    • Raj Bapuji, Debra Eagles, Nathan Ferreira, Nathan Hecht, Yuxin Zhang, Michael Y Woo, Warren J Cheung, Valentina Ly, and Paul Pageau.
    • Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
    • CJEM. 2024 Mar 1; 26 (3): 188197188-197.

    IntroductionTeaching point-of-care ultrasonography (PoCUS) to medical students is resource intensive. Peer-assisted learning, where the teacher can be a medical student, may be a feasible alternative to expert-led learning. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the PoCUS performance assessments of medical students receiving peer-assisted vs expert-led learning.MethodsThis study was submitted to PROSPERO (CRD42023383915) and reported with PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, ERIC, Education Source, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from inception to November 2022. Inclusion criteria were studies comparing peer-assisted vs expert-led PoCUS teaching for undergraduate medical students. The primary outcome was performance assessment of PoCUS skills. Two reviewers independently screened citations and extracted data. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials was used to assess study quality. Studies were included in the meta-analysis if mean performance assessment scores with standard deviations and sample sizes were available. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the accuracy score of practical knowledge test for each group. A meta-regression evaluated difference in mean scores.ResultsThe search yielded 2890 citations; 1417 unique citations remained after removing duplicates. Nine randomized-controlled studies conducted in Germany, USA, and Israel, with 593 participants, were included in the meta-analysis. The included studies assessed teaching of abdominal, cardiac, thoracic, musculoskeletal, and ocular PoCUS skills. Most studies had some risk-of-bias concerns. The estimate accuracy score after weighting is 0.56 (95% CI [0.47, 0.65]) for peer-assisted learning and 0.59 (95% CI [0.49, 0.69]) for expert-led learning. The regression coefficient estimate is 0.0281 (95% CI [- 0.1121, 0.1683]); P value is 0.69.ConclusionThis meta-analysis found that peer-assisted learning was a reasonable alternative to expert-led learning for teaching PoCUS skills to medical students.© 2024. Crown.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…